User interface area coverage

ABSTRACT

A method for user interface (UI) automation area coverage is presented. The method extracts document information from a unit test class, the unit test class being code used to test a user interface (UI). The method searches for a keyword within the extracted document information to find a keyword match. The method receives a weight factor from a user the weight factor giving more importance to certain keywords over the other keywords. The method weights specified keywords based on a weight factor, the weight factor increasing or decreasing an importance to the specified keywords. The method assigns a weight score to each keyword match based on the number of keyword matches and the weight factor. Furthermore the method generates a user interface report, the UI report comprising the weight score.

BACKGROUND

The present disclosure relates generally to computer systems for userinterface testing.

User interface (UI) testing generally ensures that a computerapplication meets its functional requirements and achieves a highstandard of quality such that it is more likely to be successfullyadopted by users.

One approach to UI testing is to simply have a human tester perform aset of user operations on the target computer application and verifythat it is behaving correctly. Manual testing is the process of manuallytesting software for defects. It requires a tester to play the role ofan end user and use most of all features of the application to ensurecorrect behavior. To ensure completeness of testing, the tester oftenfollows a written test plan that typically leads them through a set ofimportant test scenarios and cases. However, this manual approach can betime-consuming, tedious, and error-prone. A more efficient approach isto write your UI tests such that user actions are performed in anautomated way. The automated approach allows you to run your testsquickly and reliably in a repeatable manner. Over time when automated UItests are written without being linked to the manual test scripts, it isdifficult to keep track of what is automated and what needs to beautomated.

SUMMARY

The present disclosure implements a system, method, and computer programproduct for managing an electronic olfactory system.

In an embodiment, a method for managing an electronic olfactory system,is provided. The method includes extracting document information from aunit test class, the unit test class being code used to test a userinterface (UI). The method includes searching for a keyword within theextracted document information to find a keyword match. The methodincludes receiving a weight factor from a user the weight factor theweight factor increasing or decreasing an importance to the specifiedkeywords. The method includes assigning a weight score to each keywordmatch based on the number of keyword matches and the weight factor.Furthermore the method includes generating a user interface report, theUI report comprising the weight score.

In another embodiment, a computer program product for managing anelectronic olfactory system is provided. The computer program productincludes a computer-readable storage medium having program code embodiedtherewith, the program code executable by a processor of a computer toperform a method which includes extracting document information from aunit test class, the unit test class being code used to test a userinterface (UI). The computer program product includes searching for akeyword within the extracted document information to find a keywordmatch. The computer program product includes receiving a weight factorfrom a user the weight factor the weight factor increasing or decreasingan importance to the specified keywords. The computer program productincludes assigning a weight score to each keyword match based on thenumber of keyword matches and the weight factor. Furthermore thecomputer program product includes generating a user interface report,the UI report comprising the weight score.

In an embodiment, a computer system for managing an electronic olfactorysystem, is provided. The computer system includes extracting documentinformation from a unit test class, the unit test class being code usedto test a user interface (UI). The computer system includes searchingfor a keyword within the extracted document information to find akeyword match. The computer system includes receiving a weight factorfrom a user the weight factor the weight factor increasing or decreasingan importance to the specified keywords. The computer system includesassigning a weight score to each keyword match based on the number ofkeyword matches and the weight factor. Furthermore the computer systemincludes generating a user interface report, the UI report comprisingthe weight score.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1A is schematic block diagram depicting an exemplary computingenvironment for a UI coverage program, in accordance with an aspect ofthe present disclosure.

FIG. 1B is as schematic block diagram depicting components of a UIcoverage program, in accordance with an aspect of the presentdisclosure.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart depicting operational steps of a method for a UIcoverage program, in accordance with an embodiment of the presentdisclosure.

FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram depicting operations of a UIcoverage program, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of internal and external components ofcomputers and servers depicted in FIG. 1, according an embodiment of thepresent disclosure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

FIG. 1A depicts a computing environment 100 for managing the display ofapplication forms within a web-based application. In various embodimentsof the present disclosure, the computing environment 100 may include acomputer 102 and server 112 connected over communication network 110.

A computer 102 may include a processor 104 and a data storage device 106that is enabled to run a UI coverage program 108 and a web browser 116that may display an application form or a user interface for the user towork a UI coverage program 108. Non-limiting examples of a web browsermay include: Firefox®, Explorer®, or any other web browser. All brandnames and/or trademarks used herein are the property of their respectiveowners.

The computing environment 100 may also include a server 112 with adatabase 114. The server 112 may be enabled to run a program such as aUI coverage program 108. A communication network 110 may represent aworldwide collection of networks and gateways, such as the Internet,that use various protocols to communicate with one another, such asLightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP), Transport ControlProtocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), Hypertext Transport Protocol(HTTP), Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), etc. Communication network110 may also include a number of different types of networks, such as,for example, an intranet, a local area network (LAN), or a wide areanetwork (WAN).

It should be appreciated that FIG. 1A provides only an illustration ofone implementation and does not imply any limitations with regard to theenvironments in which different embodiments may be implemented. Manymodifications to the depicted environments may be made based on designand implementation requirements.

The computer 102 may communicate with the server 112 via thecommunication network 110. The communication network 110 may includeconnections, such as wire, wireless communication links, or fiber opticcables.

The computer 102 and the server 112 may be, for example, a mobiledevice, a telephone, a personal digital assistant, a netbook, a laptopcomputer, a tablet computer, a desktop computer, or any type ofcomputing device capable of running a program and accessing a network. Aprogram, such as a UI coverage program 108 may run on the computer 102or on the server 112. It should be appreciated that UI coverage program108 has the same component and operation methods regardless of whetherit is run on the server 112 or computer 102. Therefore UI coverageprogram 108 applies to both UI coverage program 108 run on a computer102 and UI coverage program 108 run on the server 112 areinterchangeably used throughout this disclosure.

Referring now to FIG. 1B, different modules of UI coverage program 108are depicted. UI coverage program 108 comprises two modules: receivingmodule 118A and testing module 118B. Receiving module 118A, may receiveunit test classes and/or some keywords. Testing module 118B maydetermine keyword matches and assign a weighted score to keywords inorder to determine the UI coverage.

In reference to FIG. 2, steps of method 200, in conjunction with thedepicted embodiment in FIG. 3, may be implemented using one or moremodules of a computer program, for example, UI coverage program 108, andexecuted by a processor of a computer, such as computer 102. It shouldbe appreciated that FIG. 2 does not imply any limitations with regard tothe environments or embodiments which may be implemented. Manymodifications to the depicted environment or embodiment shown in FIG. 2may be made.

At 202, receiving module 118A may receive one or more unit test classes.In computer programming, unit testing is a software testing method bywhich individual units of source code, sets of one or more computerprogram modules together with associated control data, usage procedures,and operating procedures, are tested to determine whether they are fitfor use. A unit as the smallest testable part of an application. Inprocedural programming, a unit could be an entire module, but it is morecommonly an individual function or procedure. In object-orientedprogramming, a unit is often an entire interface, such as a class. Unittests are short code fragments created by programmers or occasionally bywhite box testers during the development process. It forms the basis forcomponent testing. A unit test is code that exercises a specific portionof your codebase in a particular context. Typically, each unit testsends a specific input to a method and verifies that the method returnsthe expected value, or takes the expected action. Receiving module 118Amay receive a digital text stream comprising one or more words, and/orcorresponding metadata, from an electronic input source. Receivingmodule 118A may also receive the code within the classes from a user ora computer implemented system. A non-limiting example of receiving atest unit class may be inputting a corpus electronically from a computerimplemented source. In yet another embodiment, the tests are essentiallycode stored in source control (e.g. RTC). Source control allows the userto download all this code to their local file system; in thatembodiment, receiving module 118A may receive the unit test classdirectly form the source code.

In the present embodiment, receiving module 118A, receives a unit testclass from the source control code. Receiving module 118A receives thecorpus electronically from the local file system in the presentembodiment.

At 204, testing module 118B may extract information from the receivedunit test class. Testing module 118B may use variety of existing methodsto extract information from the unit test classes. In an embodimenttesting module 118B may extract the following from each unit test class:package name, class name, document comment for classes, method names,and document comments for methods. In another embodiment, an alternativeapproach to collecting this data is available. This is accomplishedthrough the layer (e.g. page objects) which uses the HTML used when theUI tests is being executed or from previously ran UI tests.

In the present embodiment, testing module 118B uses Javadoc Tool with astandard doclet via command line or IDE (e.g. Eclipse), to export a setof HTML files containing the full documentation of the unit test classesand extract information as shown below:

com.example.tests.apple

-   -   DropAppleTest.java DropAppleTest.html    -   SliceAppleTest.java SliceAppleTest.html

com.example.tests.orange

-   -   DropOrangeTest.java DropOrangeTest.html    -   PeelAppleTest.java PeelAppleTest.html

In the present embodiment, testing module 118B also, with the exportedHTML files, extracts from them only the relevant information mentionedabove. This is done, in the present embodiment, by scrapping the HTMLand using a custom or standard doclet. In the present embodimentDropAppletest has the following extracted content:

<HTML>

. . .

<!--========START OF CLASS DATA========-->

. . .

<PRE> . . . <B>com.example.tests.DropAppleTest</B></PRE>

. . .

<P>Test dropping an apple.<P>

. . .

<!--==========METHOD SUMMARY===========-->

. . .

<TD><CODE>dropAppleFromFiveMeters( )</CODE>Test dropping an apple from 5meters high.</TD>

. . .

<TD><CODE>dropAppleFromFiftyMeters( )</CODE>Test dropping an apple from50 meters high.</TD>

. . .

</HTML>

In an embodiment, testing module 118B may also organize the extractedinformation into an information chart such as information chart 302.Information chart 302 is organized by package, class name, classdocument, method name, and method document. For example in thatembodiment, the DropAppletest (with the HTML code explained above) has amethod of test dropping an apple from 5 meters high.

At 206, testing module 118B may match the extracted information with alist of keywords by searching through the extracted information for thekeyword. In an embodiment, the list of pre-defined keywords are receivedby the receiving module 118A from a user or another computer implementedsystem. Keywords can be any single word or phrase specific to UI testingdomain. For example, a user may just want to match the keyword “Slice”,or an entire phrase based on various manual test scenarios. In thatembodiment receiving module 118A may receive the list of keywordsdirectly from a user (e.g. user typing the words directly into theprogram) or by another computer implemented system. A non-limitingexample of receiving a keyword list may be inputting a corpuselectronically from a computer implemented source. In one embodiment,testing module 118B may use a regular expression string match with thefollowing rules: accounts for spacing, special characters, casesensitivity, numerical digits, alternative spellings, and plurality. Inaddition, testing module 118B may automatically notice frequentlyoccurred keywords in other manual test scenarios and use them togenerate a list of keywords. In another embodiment, testing module 118Bmay generate some keywords based on other and/or similar test cases.

In another embodiment, and alternative to receiving keywords isexplained. There may be some unit test classes which do not utilize anyJavadoc or any other method or class names. For example, in thatembodiment, a class called ClassOne with method methodOne may beutilized by the unit test class. In that embodiment, an alternativeapproach to obtaining keywords may be used. In that embodiment, testingmodule 118B may allow all the UI tests to run/execute, and generatekeywords based on the layers that interacts with the HTML. A layer isessentially the software used to execute the UI tests (e.g. Selenium).Non-limiting examples of a layer interaction may be an assert, click, atext input, title and alt tags, label and fieldset tags that correspondto inputs, filename of images, nearby text from P tags and Span tags, ortitle and keywords tag of HTML page if above is not found. It must bementioned that the use of this method to obtain keywords is not limitedto this embodiment and may be utilized in any other cases.

It must be appreciated that the use of the word “match” in an embodimentdoes not require an exact match between the keyword and the words usedwithin the unit test class. For example in an embodiment spaces can berepresented by characters/casing, keyword match may not be casesensitive, numbers can be in digits or words, alternate spellings wouldbe interchangeable, or words can be singular or plural in order for thematching process to yield more accurate results. For example in thatembodiment, FiftyMetersTest, fifty_meters_test, 50 meter tests would allbe considered a match if the key word is 50-meters-test.

In the present embodiment, receiving module 118A receives the keywordlist directly from the user (e.g. user types the keywords into the UIcoverage program 108). The keywords to gauge the UI test coverage are:

-   -   Apple    -   Orange    -   Drop    -   Slice    -   Peel    -   50 meters

In the present embodiment, testing module 118B determines the matchesbetween keyword and the content of the unit test class and organizes theinformation within chart 304. As illustrated in chart 304, testingmodule 118B matches the above-mentioned keywords with each portion ofthe extracted information within the unit test class. Testing module118B, also calculates the total match (i.e. total number of matches of aparticular keyword).

At 208, testing module 118B may assign a weighted score to each of thekeyword matches in order to measure the accuracy of these matches. In anembodiment, weight factors are assigned to each type of matched by auser. A weight factor can be used to give more importance to certainmatched keywords over the other matched keywords. For example in oneembodiment, if a keyword is matched within the class document or packagename it is weighted differently. In another embodiment, if the keywordis matched within the method document it is weighted less than if thesame keyword is matched within the class name. In yet anotherembodiment, the weighted score may be the same for all keyword matches.In that embodiment, the weighted score is simply based on the number ofmatches. These weights may be adjusted according to the particularknowledge of the naming and documentation conventions used in the testcode. For example, in an embodiment, if the class document is normallyvery short and specific, matching the words from it is more reliable sothe weight can be higher. In yet another embodiment, if the classdocument tends to be long and descriptive, a lower weight might be moresuitable since there is more chance of it containing off-topic words.Each weight could be 100/100 if that is the most suitable. It must bementioned that different weights for different keyword matches may bepre-defined or input directly by a user. In that embodiment, user maydirectly input or modify the different weights. The weighted scoresindicate the level of confidence for the matches found. Therefore itmust be appreciated that the total match is an unfiltered/raw numberwhereas the weighted match is a more analyzed/accurate number calculatedby the algorithm.

In the present embodiment, user has input the following weight factorsfor the scoring purposes:

-   -   Package name—10/10    -   Class name—10/10    -   Class doc— 9/10    -   Method name— 9/10    -   Method doc— 8/10        As illustrated in “weighted match” column (column 310) of the        chart 304, the weight factor is multiplied by the number of        matches. For example in the present embodiment, the key word “50        meters” has been matched one time within the method document.        And since the weight factor for method doc is 8/10 or 80%,        testing module 118B assign a 0.8 weighted scored to 50 meters        keyword (e.g. 1×0.8=0.8). It must also be appreciated that in        the present embodiment, total match is not a simple addition of        all the previous matches, it is the highest number of matches        within any category (represented by each column within chart 304        and organized by each keyword (as illustrated by row 308        representing “apple”).

In the present embodiment, chart 304 contains the information of keywordmatches and the weighted score. For example as illustrated in chart 304,the keyword apple has been used in the package name. Each match is pertest class. This means that even though the word “apple” is found in 5places of the DropAppleTest class, it will only count as a single match.The SliceAppleTest class also has similar matches so “apple” has a totalmatch of 2.

In an embodiment, different unit test classes may be compared side byside in a UI coverage report as illustrated in chart 306 (step 210).Unit tests Alpha and Bravo have been both analyzed by the testing module118B and both given a total match and a weighted score. It must beappreciated that while the total matches are the same, in thisembodiment and due to weight factors, the weighted scores may bedifferent as illustrated by the weighted score column of chart 306.

Referring now to FIG. 4 of components a computer system, for exampleserver 112 and data source 120, of computing environment 100 of FIG. 1,in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure.

Server 112 may include one or more processors 402, one or morecomputer-readable RAMs 404, one or more computer-readable ROMs 406, oneor more computer readable storage media 408, device drivers 412,read/write drive or interface 414, network adapter or interface 416, allinterconnected over a communications fabric 418. Communications fabric418 may be implemented with any architecture designed for passing dataand/or control information between processors (such as microprocessors,communications and network processors, etc.), system memory, peripheraldevices, and any other hardware components within a system.

One or more operating systems 410, and one or more application programs411, are stored on one or more of the computer readable storage media408 for execution by one or more of the processors 402 via one or moreof the respective RAMs 404 (which typically include cache memory). Inthe illustrated embodiment, each of the computer readable storage media408 may be a magnetic disk storage device of an internal hard drive,CD-ROM, DVD, memory stick, magnetic tape, magnetic disk, optical disk, asemiconductor storage device such as RAM, ROM, EPROM, flash memory orany other computer-readable tangible storage device that can store acomputer program and digital information.

Server 112 and computer 102 may also include an R/W drive or interface414 to read from and write to one or more portable computer readablestorage media 426. Application programs 411 on server 112 and computer102 may be stored on one or more of the portable computer readablestorage media 426, read via the respective R/W drive or interface 414and loaded into the respective computer readable storage media 408.

Server 112 may also include a network adapter or interface 416, such asa TCP/IP adapter card or wireless communication adapter (such as a 4Gwireless communication adapter using OFDMA technology). Applicationprograms 411 on server 112 and may be downloaded to the computing devicefrom an external computer or external storage device via a network (forexample, the Internet, a local area network or other wide area networkor wireless network) and network adapter or interface 416. From thenetwork (such as network 428) or interface 416, the programs may beloaded onto computer readable storage media 408. The network maycomprise copper wires, optical fibers, wireless transmission, routers,firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/or edge servers.

Server 112 and computer 102 may also include a display screen 420, akeyboard or keypad 422, and a computer mouse or touchpad 424. Devicedrivers 412 interface to display screen 420 for imaging, to keyboard orkeypad 422, to computer mouse or touchpad 424, and/or to display screen420 for pressure sensing of alphanumeric character entry and userselections. The device drivers 412, R/W drive or interface 414 andnetwork adapter or interface 416 may comprise hardware and software(stored on computer readable storage media 408 and/or ROM 406).

While the present invention is particularly shown and described withrespect to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by thoseskilled in the art that changes in forms and details may be made withoutdeparting from the spirit and scope of the present application. It istherefore intended that the present invention not be limited to theexact forms and details described and illustrated herein, but fallswithin the scope of the appended claims.

The present disclosure may be a system, a method, and/or a computerprogram product. The computer program product may include a computerreadable storage medium (or media) having computer readable programinstructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of thepresent disclosure.

The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that canretain and store instructions for use by an instruction executiondevice. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but isnot limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device,an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, asemiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of thecomputer readable storage medium includes the following: a portablecomputer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), aread-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROMor Flash memory), a static random access memory (SRAM), a portablecompact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD),a memory stick, a floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such aspunch-cards or raised structures in a groove having instructionsrecorded thereon, and any suitable combination of the foregoing. Acomputer readable storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construedas being transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freelypropagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagatingthrough a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g., light pulsespassing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical signals transmittedthrough a wire.

Computer readable program instructions described herein can bedownloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computerreadable storage medium or to an external computer or external storagedevice via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, awide area network and/or a wireless network. The network may comprisecopper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wirelesstransmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/oredge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in eachcomputing/processing device receives computer readable programinstructions from the network and forwards the computer readable programinstructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium withinthe respective computing/processing device.

Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations ofthe present disclosure may be assembler instructions,instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions,machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions,state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in anycombination of one or more programming languages, including an objectoriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++ or the like, andconventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C”programming language or similar programming languages. The computerreadable program instructions may execute entirely on the user'scomputer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone softwarepackage, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computeror entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario,the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through anytype of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer(for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example,programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), orprogrammable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readableprogram instructions by utilizing state information of the computerreadable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry,in order to perform aspects of the present disclosure.

Aspects of the present disclosure are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of thedisclosure. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer readable program instructions.

These computer readable program instructions may be provided to aprocessor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, orother programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, suchthat the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computeror other programmable data processing apparatus, create means forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructionsmay also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can directa computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or otherdevices to function in a particular manner, such that the computerreadable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises anarticle of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects ofthe function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram blockor blocks.

The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto acomputer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other deviceto cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer,other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computerimplemented process, such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement thefunctions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block orblocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods, and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof instructions, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). In some alternativeimplementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of theorder noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in successionmay, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks maysometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon thefunctionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of theblock diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocksin the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implementedby special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specifiedfunctions or acts or carry out combinations of special purpose hardwareand computer instructions.

Based on the foregoing, a computer system, method, and computer programproduct have been disclosed. However, numerous modifications andsubstitutions can be made without deviating from the scope of thepresent disclosure. Therefore, the present disclosure has been disclosedby way of example and not limitation.

The invention claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method for userinterface (UI) automation area coverage, comprising: receiving, by aserver, a source code from a user, the source code comprising two unittest classes, the two unit test classes being code used to test a userinterface (UI); extracting, by a computer, document information fromeach of the two unit test classes, the document information comprisingpackage name, class name, and document code, for each of the two unittest classes; receiving, by the computer, a keyword from a user;searching, by the computer, for the keyword within the extracteddocument information in order to find keyword matches within each of thetwo unit test classes; determining a number of keyword matches for eachof the two unit test classes, the number of keyword matches comprising anumber of time the keyword has occurred within each of the two extracteddocument information; receiving, by the computer, a weight factor from auser, wherein the weight factor is defined by increasing or decreasingan importance to the keywords from a user for each of the two unit testclasses; assigning, by the computer, a weight score to each keywordmatch based on the number of keyword matches and the weight factorwherein the weight score is calculated based on the number of matches ofthe searched keywords multiplied by the weight factor received from theuser for each of the two unit test classes; determining, by thecomputer, a total match and a total weight score for the unit test foreach of the two unit test classes; ranking, by the computer, each of thetwo unit test classes based on the respective weight scores; andgenerating, by the computer, a UI coverage report, the UI coveragereport comprising the weight score and their respective ranks for eachof the two unit test classes.